Do I need a 70-200mm f2.8L IS II?

Started May 24, 2014 | Discussions thread
Al Downie Senior Member • Posts: 1,362
Re: Do I need a 70-200mm f2.8L IS II?

The important thing to recognise about 'professionals' (I used to be one) is not that they're better photographers than the rest of us, or more knowledgeable, or more demanding of equipment. It's simply that their living depends on them getting a usable shot. In the case of photojournalists and press photographers (probably the groups who rely most on the 70-200 f2.8), their picture editors won't be looking for artistic bokeh, or eye-watering sharpness - the only thing that matters is getting that shot of Obama sneezing, or the child crying, or the angry Islamic mob, or whatever. The 70-200 is dependable and versatile, but it's not spectacular compared to any prime in its range; nor does it do anything special. In the right hands, it's as good as a guarantee of getting a *usable* shot, and that's all a professional needs. If you don't have to work under that kind of pressure, you'll probably have a lot more fun with good primes.

If you're looking for something *REALLY* special to spend your money on, why not save a bit longer for the 200mm f2? That's an astonishing piece of glass!

 Al Downie's gear list:Al Downie's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R APD XF 90mm Fujifilm XF 35mm F2 R WR +1 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow